KU-UCLA Game Disputed – Recount of Score Demanded
(AP) – New York
Steve Lavin and the UCLA Bruins are demanding a recount of the game
in which Kansas won 99 to 98. “The baskets were confusing,” says
Lavin. “I’m sure that some of the balls that went in Kansas’ basket were
meant to go into ours. Kansas teams would never have scored nearly one-
hundred points. There’s no way we lost this one. UCLA demands a recount.”
Kansas officials are calling his “outrageous”. “They agreed to the
size and shape of the baskets prior to tip-off,” replies KU coach Roy
Williams. “If they had a problem with them, they should have said so
before we started.
You don’t get to keep playing until you’re happy with the outcome.
Someone had to lose. We’ve scored over one hundred points many times.”
UCLA has sent lawyers as well as their athletic director to Madison Square
Garden, where the scoreboard will be tested. Bob Frederick, athletic
director for Kansas, will be there as well to oversee the process. “We are
confident that when the points are re-totaled, we will be the winner of
the game,” says Frederick.
Kansas also points out that in many games prior to this one, the same
baskets were used. “They didn’t have a problem with the baskets until
they lost,” says Williams.
Outside the garden, UCLA student protesters have gathered outside bearing
signs such as, “UCLA wants a fair game!”. Students’thoughts echoed their
signs. “All we want is a fair total of the points before we declare a
winner,” says student Karen Hays, a Bruin from California. “We need to
proceed cautiously and not rush to judgment before we declare a winner.”
ESPN, around 7pm eastern time, had mistakenly declared UCLA the winner,
despite the 16 point lead the Jayhawks held at that point. At about
8:30pm, with the game still to close to call, ESPN had to back off
College Basketball analyst Jay Bilas made the call. “We felt that with a
number of points still not added in by Cummings and Watson, two very good
scorers, we were certain UCLA would carry this game. We may have been
premature in our prediction.”